Tuesday, September 18, 2012

At
the beginning of his book The Ravenous Brain, Daniel Bor talks
about having been at the crossroads between science and philosophy
during his university years. In other words, it was the choice
between an empirical and concrete versus a rational and abstract
approach. He chose the former and became a neuroscientist.

Two
thoughts (or sets of firing neurons) went through my mind (brain):
One,
he should have chosen philosophy because of its more speculative,
hence attractive and less rigid nature, and two,
this book was going to be a real challenge for me as my brain tends
to have a hard time understanding neuroscience or practically
anything rooted in or associated with biology. (Strangely enough, it
loves astrophysics though on a very basic, dummy-kind of level).

From
the onset, I noticed a fallacy at work here. Science is the quest for
patterns (due to how our brain is wired for “chunking” or
combining incoming data) and for a fact-based truth that can be
tested and retested with a pronounced focus on statistics and
numbers. It should then come as no surprise that there are even
serious-minded, albeit heavy-handed attempts at measuring
consciousness with numbers.

Philosophy,
however, is less interested in the question of what (content)
or how (process) but rather in its provocative cousin of why
(reason and purpose). So patterns may be useful and may give us vital
information about the nature of existence, but they still give us few
clues about the reason of our being here, its raison d'être. The root
problem of science is the assumption that their observed and
observable facts (seeing is believing) is able to override the
philosopher's mainly intangible or speculative thoughts and ideas.

The dilemma Bor proposes in the first pages is one I have struggled
with myself. I have no problems accepting and embracing evolutionary
psychology; in fact, I find that topic fascinating and have and will
continue to write and post about it, but I cringe whenever anybody
tries to reduce human thought, behavior and consciousness to the
common biological denominator, the floating jelly- and walnut-like
substance in our heads.

This
problem goes back to Descartes who exposed the physical parts of
existence, that we are complex biological machines, but who struggled
to infuse his view with a “soul” (apparently located somewhere in
the pineal gland). This futile and desperate attempt is often dubbed
the “Ghost in the Machine.” Bor, in fact, claims that our very
consciousness, the “I am, therefore I exist” part of each of us,
that chattering voice in our head is not only an evolutionary
by-product but it can be deduced to certain areas and parts of our
physical information-processing brain.

The
evidence sides with the neuroscientist. Brain scans reveal essential
information about which parts of the brain are used when
consciousness is at work. Brain damage to certain areas diminish
awareness and may lead to a vegetative state or a coma. And in other
cases, brain activity in the prefrontal parietal network (I am
simply copying and pasting this word from Bor's book) can be
increased through medication leading to a heightening of
consciousness levels. All these observations have come to be factual
and are generally stable and consistent.

Put
differently, our brain not only controls our behavior, but our
personality to boot. If I think of a certain subject or have an idea,
a specific part or rather a complex network of interactive areas of
my brain will be activated; if I take drugs other parts will be
influenced and affected and all of these cause changes in my
sensations and thoughts. It leads to the conclusion that we may be
nothing but our brains, the “most complex lump of matter in the
known universe,” which is our master and commander, according to
Bor.

I
have difficulty swallowing that because it does not feel “right”
and it would reduce notions of spirituality to nothing but physical
processes. For example, we can look at a spiritual or even
enlightening drug experience in terms of brain chemistry. We can
analyze the feelings and sensations and break it down into biological
processes. But that still misses the qualitative, subjective
relevance of that experience, something that science is trying to
come closer to but has, up to now at least, generally failed to
achieve in a satisfactory manner.

My
next point why it is difficult to accept the fact that our brain is
running the show is that I simply do not understand its workings and
mechanisms too well. Here I admit to two personal shortcomings
followed by a pretext: I lack the knowledge of how the brain works
because I find it difficult and confusing and because I am rather
prejudiced against biological processes. My pretext: that is how my
brain is wired.

Fortunately,
those factors did not stop me from reading on. Although I still hold
onto spiritual and metaphysical truths, I have now, significant
thanks to Daniel Bor, a somewhat better understanding (and yes even
appreciation) of our brain.

And
that is indeed no small feat. Although this book is delightful for
novice and expert alike, Bor's style, images and examples will make
the most biologically-resistant, -impaired and -challenged (I am
talking about myself here) see and understand the whats and hows of
the brain. Neurons are compared to staff emails of large companies
with its different departments, including those of security and
management, while our brain is depicted as the noisiest (and perhaps
most dangerous) part on Earth with all its chatting and shooting (and
gun-toting) neurons.

Although
the subject may look “dry” and sophisticated (evolution and brain
mechanism explaining the rise and production of consciousness, or in
his own words and subtitle: How
the New Science of Consciousness Explains Our Insatiable Search for
Meaning), there are
pearls of wisdom held together by a witty and playful style
(“ravenous” what an excellent, creative and humorous use of a
modifier for a scientific book!) and various (though not enough for
my literary taste) personal references and vagaries, such as his
aimless and distracted walk around the country-side where Virginia
Woolf and Ludwig Wittgenstein used to roam or his baby daughter's
frolicking walk on the author's back.

There
is also a sheer abundance of useful and practical knowledge in this
book. I learned that octopuses are the geniuses of the ocean, that
hits and blows to the head and concussions often result in low level
brain damage and the loss of neurons (hence my staunch reluctance to
register my son for hockey in the future), and that sleep and coffee
are more than good for you; they can prevent serious mental
illnesses, for instance.

Furthermore,
Bor mentions the importance of consciousness and its relation to
mental health, as well as the pitfalls of “chunking” showing us
that the way our brain organizes thoughts and schemata can easily
lead to faulty logic or prejudice if not closely attended to (though
I still consciously
harbor irrational beliefs, such as superstitions and religion).

His
final reflections on meditation are very helpful but seem a bit
rushed. It would have been interesting to see it developed and
expanded in perhaps another book (?), a sequel to this fascinating
and enlightening investigation of consciousness.

All
in all, this book may not have changed my brain, I mean mind (!) but
it certainly taught me many a thing for which I am most grateful. My
only regret is that I did not read this book (because it had not been
written yet) in my undergraduate years of psychology where it would
have been an extremely reliable and valuable fountain of information
and knowledge.

Google Website Translator Gadget

Goodreads

A simple and straightforward overview of psychoanalysis with a focus on child psychology. Anna Freud's style is clear, compassionate and engaging.
I was quite interested in learning about the differences between the psychoanalytic treat...

Each / either field (Zen Buddhism / Psychoanalysis) is fascinating on its own terms but one day I felt that they were intimately and intricately connected and that turns out to be true! Although the book as a brief and general survey mer...